Novel Topology MC pre-preamp - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analogue Source

Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th March 2010, 05:37 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Default Novel Topology MC pre-preamp

I have been simulating an MC pre-preamp which has a slightly different topology from the usual. It is a no GFB design, where the V- inputs are shorted to gnd. The gain of 24 dB is set by a combination of gm and the drain resistors. Upper and lower halves are shorted together at AC frequencies. This configuration offers two advantages. The first is a substantial (30 dB or better) reduction in distortion. The second is a approx a 3 dB increase in SNR due to the effective paralleling of two correlated signal sources whose noise is uncorrelated. Attached is the active circuit schematic.

Simulated distortion is lower than the noise floor for inputs up to 10 mVPP. The simulated input noise for 3x paralleled 2sj74/2sk170 is 0.28nV/sqrt(Hz)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg jfet_mc_amp.jpg (57.7 KB, 401 views)
__________________
JCM

Last edited by analog_guy; 5th March 2010 at 05:50 AM. Reason: Error on Schematic
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2010, 04:06 PM   #2
ji4m is offline ji4m  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas
Looks interesting, although I don't have enough 2sj74 to build it. Do you simulate with slightly unmatched devices, or assume perfect pairings? I hope this isn't bad form, but would you be willing to share the spice cir file?

Last edited by ji4m; 10th March 2010 at 04:16 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2010, 07:19 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Default Fet Matching

Quote:
Originally Posted by ji4m View Post
Do you simulate with slightly unmatched devices, or assume perfect pairings
For the initial simulations I assumed matched devices. The noise floor is not substantially changed due to device mismatch, but the distortion is. Devices of a given polarity need to be matched, but devices of opposite polarity do not. That is why the pos and neg sections are tied together at audio frequencies by the two 0.1 uf caps.

Matching devices for distortion entails matching three parameters: Rs, beta, and Vto. For the devices in question lambda is small enough to not require matching. The generalized matching problem can be addressed by using external passive components to adjust the effective Vto and Rs, leaving only beta, which can be matched by device screening. It may be sufficient to match only Idss. Once I buy a number of devices and do a spice parameter extraction I'll know.
__________________
JCM
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2010, 09:34 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
I see 1uF not 0.1uF.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 03:04 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Default Capacitor Value

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
I see 1uF not 0.1uF.
Good catch. However, the two capacitors form a voltage divider with the gate impedance of the follower jfets. So the corner frequency for either 0.1 or 1.0 uF will still be below the audio range.
__________________
JCM
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 04:28 AM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Then i whould prefer a 0.1uF because they are awailable in very good quality.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 07:40 AM   #7
EC8010 is offline EC8010  United Kingdom
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
EC8010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Near London. UK
FETs and MCs don't really mix - take a look at the 1/f noise frequency. On the other hand, distortion really shouldn't be a problem at such low levels.
__________________
The loudspeaker: The only commercial Hi-Fi item where a disproportionate part of the budget isn't spent on the box. And the one where it would make a difference...
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 08:02 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
analog_sa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sofia
Quote:
Originally Posted by EC8010 View Post
FETs and MCs don't really mix


This statement probably has a solid ground in some textbook but is in direct contradiction with many of the best existing designs. Should owners scrap their Vendettas or just use them with MMs?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 11:12 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
In the 2SK170 and 2SK74 1/f corner frequency is quite high at 1 to 4kHz but the rise is very slow.
In praxis the noise can be very low.
I have build several stages with 4 or 8 units in parallel that had excelent noise performance.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2010, 01:18 PM   #10
работник
diyAudio Member
 
Rod Coleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Warwickshire UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by EC8010 View Post
FETs and MCs don't really mix - take a look at the 1/f noise frequency. On the other hand, distortion really shouldn't be a problem at such low levels.
The flicker noise is certainly not a problem for practical designs. The moving coil presents near to a dead short to the gate-source at low frequencies, which doesn't hurt. I use only one 2SK369 (7V, 7mA, shunt cascode) with 11 Ohm in the source for degeneration, and this works perfectly for a Lyra Lydian-Beta. If you get an ear close enough to the tweeter, only some higher frequency noise is perceptible, contrary to the 1/f suspicion.

Just watch out for Igsx (excess gate current) when applying the Toshiba JFETs: it starts at about 8V for practical drain currents, I suspect 12V is too much - even small Igsx current is likely to be noisy.

I would be interested to see any device that is claimed to be better for interfacing a moving coil cartridge than a TOSHIBA large geometry JFET, as shown in this design.

I am assuming that BJTs are out due to the need for coupling capacitors, and although I'd enjoy using a valve, the grid leakage current keeps me away from them - turn-ON pulses of microamp level are hard to avoid (and the Lyra's designer, Jonathan Carr is on record in these pages as declaring these to be a factor in needing to fluxbust). That's before you tackle the noise problem with valves, or their high loop area at the input (electromagnetic 'moment') degrading the external field susceptibility. Enough said about Microphony! MOSFETs are out for certain due to noise level.

What's left? Transformers? I'm not fee-paying enough to buy one that's possibly good enough to try it out. Mr van den Hul has given reason enough why he wouldn't use one, and as a designer of magnetic systems generating this very signal, I'll be content to respect his opinion!

The TOSHIBA 2SK369 and his relatives were designed explicitly for use as "first stage in MC and head amplifier", and I find their low noise, low voltage operation, dc-coupled input, pA input current, high gain AND low output impedance circuit possibilities are all excellent properties when solving the MC input problem. And so long as you can buy thousands of these excellent parts for the cost of a trafo that might begin to compete, I see only one choice!!!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pearl MC Pre-Preamp promitheus Pass Labs 230 5th July 2014 04:57 PM
Better MC Pre-Pre solution for low internal coil resistance- not only for Pearl phono tiefbassuebertr Pass Labs 17 27th June 2014 10:54 AM
Need suggestion for tube MC pre-pre inertial Analog Line Level 18 8th March 2009 09:28 PM
Schematic - B & K MC-101 Sonata (Pro-MC-10) Preamp dtm1962 Solid State 0 13th June 2006 08:46 PM
MC input topology: transformers or active stages? mrfeedback Analogue Source 29 20th September 2002 11:17 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:19 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2